THAT'S ALL THE BULLETS WE HAD

NM Leon

NM Leon

New member
As reported earlier this week, some dirtbag who got pulled over in a routine traffic stop in Florida ended up "executing" the deputy who stopped him. The deputy was shot eight times, including once behind his right ear at close range. Another deputy was wounded and a police dog killed.

A statewide manhunt ensued. The low-life piece of human garbage was found hiding in a wooded area with his gun. SWAT team officers fired and hit said low-life 68 times.

Now here's the kicker: Asked why they shot the guy 68 times, Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd told the Orlando Sentinel...get this. "That's all the bullets we had, or we would have shot him more."

God bless Sheriff Judd! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
Unfortunately, thats a good one! A shame the deputies got shot up. Too bad they didn't catch him alive and then shoot him 68 times and show it to the whole world. Set an example for the next idiot who tries something like that.
 
Working in Law Enforcement, I have mixed feelings on this one.

One the right hand, I would probably have done the exact same thing. I want you all to know that up front.

On the left hand, I honestly can not condone the fact that a person was shot 68 times by less than 10 people. Even using automatic weapons, 6 shots per person IS a bit much. Again, it is easy to sit back and play armchair quarterback in this type of situation.
 
Amusingly, the reverse is usually the case, meaning, the officers fire an enormous number of shots, resulting in very few hits. One video I viewed, showed two officers approach a suspect sitting against a chain link fence at a public park. Suspect had handgun in one hand, waving it aorund like he was incoherent and babbling asking officers for a ciggarette, which they did indeed give him. As they tried to talk him into dropping the weapon, doing the usual law enforcement screaming and yelling while waving their own weapons around, the perp, raised his revolver in their general direction.
The distance was what appeared to be maybe a long ten feet, the two officers squirted something on the order of 23 rounds in the general diecetion of the poor devil, and did eventually manage to hit him exactly two times, neither of the two shots were mortal,and the guy was hauled off to the hospital:)
In over 25 years of competitive pistol and revolver shooting,at national and international level, I'd have to say in all honesty, that only a few competitors who were in law enforcement or had that background, could shoot at a competitive level, most were abysmal shots with poor stress composure. The best LE types Ive shot with were invariably Border Patrol, SOs and local police, were the worst.
 
So the question remains, "Were 68 shots fired, or was the suspect hit 68 times?" If it was 68 hits, then it sounds to me like the cops reloaded a couple of times. Just to make sure, ya know? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif Street justice, at its finest.
 
Get a team of highly motivated officers with MP5's or a shorty AR varient with 30 round mag's in place, in a densly vegatated area of Florida palmeto swamp, after an equally motivated dangerous killer. They are in a close line pattern search threading their way through the very thick cover. Someone near the middle of the line contacts the armed killer at close range with limited visibility because of the vegatation, yells, "don't move" or something along those lines. The bad guy ignores the order, moves the firearms he has in a threatning manner, and the first officer triggers a controlled burst from his weapon. Surrounding officers do the same, fire a short controlled burst, fire again... stop. That all takes about 4-5 seconds. Anyone with experience can easily see how the number count of shots would be high. It's not the officers fault - it's the suspects! Hell, he shouldn't have killed people, then tried to do so again. Dead is dead, six shots or sixty, screw him he made up their mind for them by his actions.

Chile,
While I haven't seen the video you described it sounds as if the officers definately need remedial range time. As a firearms instructor I've seen more than my share of lousy shots in LE. One point, give them credit for being out there and facing the threat. Many a range ninja talks big talk, but doesn't have the balls to put it on the line where the rubber meets the road.
 
GC, I understand EXACTLY what you are saying, but 9 of ten guys firing at him, firing 110 shots, that is 4 - 3 round bursts per officer. I can see 2, but that many people firing that many rounds is merely a civil suit about using excessive force just waiting to happen.

The Associated Press



Officers fired 110 rounds of ammunition at the man suspected of killing a sheriff's deputy, according to an autopsy and records released by the sheriff's office Saturday.

Angilo Freeland - who was suspected of fatally shooting the deputy after being pulled over for speeding Thursday - was hit 68 times by the SWAT team members' shots, the examination showed.

He also was suspected of wounding a deputy and killing a police dog.

Freeland's death ended a nearly 24-hour manhunt that forced schools to lock down and families to stay indoors as about 500 officers scoured the woods.

The wounded deputy had pulled Freeland over for speeding and became suspicious of his identification. The suspect got nervous and bolted into the woods, officials said.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said he was not concerned by the number of shots fired.

"You have to understand, he had already shot and killed a deputy, he had already shot and killed a K-9 and he shot and injured another deputy," Judd said by phone Saturday. "Quite frankly, we weren't taking any chances."

Ten SWAT officers surrounded Freeland on Friday as he hid beneath brush and a fallen tree in a rural area. Authorities say he raised the gun belonging to the deputy he had killed, prompting nine officers to fire.

"I suspect the only reason 110 rounds was all that was fired was that's all the ammunition they had," Judd said. "We were not going to take any chance of him shooting back."

The SWAT officers who shot Freeland have been placed on paid administrative leave, standard procedure in all police shootings.

Also released Saturday were autopsy results for the deputy, Vernon Matthew Williams, 39, which showed he had been shot eight times. He was not wearing a protective vest, but shots hit him in his right leg and behind his right ear, among other places.

Diogi, his German shepherd police dog, was also killed. The dog had been shot once in the chest.

Authorities said deputy sheriff Doug Speirs, also 39, was fired at several times and shot once in the leg. A sergeant and an officer from the Lakeland Police Department were also fired at, authorities said.
 
Quote:
"Quite frankly, we weren't taking any chances."



That's the statement for the public. That guy could have waved a white flag from under that log and they would have done nothing different. When he killed the cop, he signed his own death warrant. What "we weren't taking any chances" really means, is "we weren't taking any chances that he'd find some ACLU lawyer that would get him off on a lesser charge with 5 years probation". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
Chile is right.

Actually 68 hits out of 110 fired is very good shooting in a real world LE firefight. It was probably a reflection of their SWAT training.

Remember the guy who was shot in the doorway in N.Y.C.? Four officers confronting the guy from less than six feet away. When he reached for his wallet, one of the officers thought it was a gun, yelled "GUN" and fired. Hearing "gun" followed by gunfire, the others opened up too. If memory serves, they fired 48 shots and hit him 21 times from less than 6ft away. I think only three shots were determined to have been mortal.

The military established long ago that in their first firefight, people rarely hit what they are supposedly shooting at, even though they may be expert marksmen on the range. That's one of the reasons the infantry philosophy changed from accuracy to firepower, and one of the reasons many civilian departments went to high capacity sidearms.

Very intensive and ongoing training (or constant battlefield danger) helps to ameliorate the problem, but that's not an option available to most LEOs.

Leon
 
Quote:
Quote:
"Quite frankly, we weren't taking any chances."



That's the statement for the public. That guy could have waved a white flag from under that log and they would have done nothing different. When he killed the cop, he signed his own death warrant. "we weren't taking any chances" really means "we weren't taking any chances that he'd find some ACLU lawyer that would get him off on a lesser charge with 5 years probation". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif



I agree "dead man walking" /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
Leon, looking back at a recent case in AZ, a civilian went to prison in part because the jury thought the defendent shooting the assailant three times with HP bullets was excessive force and not self defense.

I suspect that if I shot an armed intruder in my house 30-40 times, I would have a problem too.
 
Different question altogether, Jim.

In the NY case I believe all four officers were exonerated by the review board, but the city still wound up paying a multimillion dollar settlement.

Although it was a "cause celeb" for a while, I think that was probably a pretty reasonable outcome.

The guy was unarmed and not a threat (as it turned out) and his family certainly deserved compensation for his "wrongful death".

On the other hand at the time the cops involved thought he was armed and an immediate threat and did the right thing given the circumstances.

I don't know anything about the AZ case, but if you alone shot an armed intruder 30 times you might have a small problem.

The "standard", according to what I learned in my CCW classes, is whether you are responding to an immediate threat. Once the threat is over, you can't shoot. That gets a little iffy because it is dependant on whether you think you were threatened. On the other hand, in the simulator training, we were taught to keep shooting until the perp was down (no longer a threat).

A cop friend of mine once told me that if I ever had to shoot someone, I should only tell the cops "I thought he was trying to kill me", then shut up and get a lawyer.
 
I was taught in my CHL class to keep shooting until the threat was over. If carrying an automatic weapon a whole lot of rounds could get fired before I felt the situation was neutralized.
 
Quote:
Quote:
"Quite frankly, we weren't taking any chances."



That's the statement for the public. That guy could have waved a white flag from under that log and they would have done nothing different. When he killed the cop, he signed his own death warrant. What "we weren't taking any chances" really means, is "we weren't taking any chances that he'd find some ACLU lawyer that would get him off on a lesser charge with 5 years probation". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif



Tom - you only speak the truth brother! In this world today of cop killers and child molesters it is seeming to become a common response "We can rehabilitate him". You have to take a different approach to a criminal when they will kill or even fire on a Police Officer. If they are willing to do that, imagine what they will do to an unarmed citizen. Sheriff Grady Judd for PRESIDENT! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif
 
Just think of all the tax dollars that SWAT team saved. Won't have to feed that guy and put him up in a room. Best 110 rounds spent. Sorry, I don't have any sympathy for some jerk that just gives another excuse for the anti-gun folks. Not to mention the loss of somebodies son and husband.
 
All,

Please don't misread my feelings. I am in the same boat that most of you are in, however, I wish that he had only been hit 10 times out of 30 rounds.
 
Quote:
I wish that he had only been hit 10 times out of 30 rounds.



That's only a 30% hit rate. Not good enough for the work we do. I'll take the 65% rate of the above story. When I became the Firearms Instructor of our department way back in the day it was only required to shoot 70% on a very, very, basic course of fire. This was once a year, no night fire. We worked in the classroom and on the range polishing up on weapon familiarity, handling skills, and tactics. I then introduced movement and shooting from cover, along with weapons handling, emergency action drills, low light and night shooting. We began to qualify three times per year and the guys were responding well. Then I told them the score to qualify would now be 80%. They raised the roof! I heard, "That's stupid, nobody is going to qualify." Ya know what? They all qualified the first time through. Even the very guys who formally had to reshoot on the old static target shooters type course made it. Confidence levels went up and the ones who used to groan and complain about Q-Day began to look forward to it. Expectations... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif
 
Our firearms instructor often drills this into our guys. When firing in a real life situation, you only hit about half of what your typical qualification score was, so 70% equals 35%. Now couple that with the fact thjat they were using automatic weapons, I think that 33% would be alright. Now, we can easily quarterback this thing to death, but the guy will still be dead, and he will be buried looking like a piece of swiss cheese.

Let us put this into a different perspective. Say a bear was advancing towards you and 9 of your friends, would you each shoot 11 shots at the bear, or would you fire 3 times each and then re-evaluate? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top